[ietf-dkim] New issue: base-00 3.5 x= (was: testing Message Corpus& question for base spec)

[Hector Santos]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de>


> Douglas Otis wrote:
>
>  [base-00 3.5 x=]
> > The MUST in the draft may be a bit harsh.
>
> Yes, s/MUST/SHOULD/ makes sense, e.g. if a MUA behind IMAP
> wants to check signatures.  Editorial nit:  Splitting 3.5 in
> subsections for the various "field types" could be a good idea.
>

Just a follow up to my previous message.

This section says the default is NO expiration.

That isn't going to work very well :-)

A DKIM message will no expiration will quickly moving into a reject
classification if other issues are found with the message.

This will be especially the case with key policy "t=y" testing flag
(section 3.6.1).

This section should make the x= mandatory for t=y key policies and
should recommend a short expiration for testing.

A long "testing period" with problematic DKIM messages should not be
tolerated.

--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com